Re: Need Job Help

Lenneth Fri Mar 27, 2020 8:30 am

tiffany_elizabeth wrote:
Lenneth wrote:1) Idaho has inversely named a Law called "Right to Work" witch allows employers to fire people with literally No Reason at all and as little as 10 seconds notice.

I don't have anything to say on the job issue, other than to go onto Facebook and search for your name. Odds are someone out there has the same name as you and they're the one potential employers are coming across. It might be the only one that shows up in your area, or they may just be lazy and click the first name that matches. If there's another one you might want to make a Facebook account of your own. It doesn't matter what you put on it, though since one of the replies more or less said "your politics are all wrong" I would avoid political topics. If there's more than one result for an area and they're actually looking (I suspect half the time they use "Facebook results" it's just a stock line they give people whose resumes they didn't even glance at) it will cast enough doubt to keep them from basing a decision solely on what they see on Facebook.

Did that some time back, all with the same name have their accounts set to private.

tiffany_elizabeth wrote:"Right to work" doesn't govern an employer's ability to fire you without reason. That's "at will employment." Any job where you don't have an employment contract is at will, and it doesn't matter which state it's in. It's why most businesses make it clear that your job application, if you're hired, does not constitute an employment contract. That's to keep you at "at will" status.

Missouri doesn't have a "right to work" law. I could go into work tomorrow and my manager could say "I don't like the color of your eyes. Clock out, go home, and you're off the schedule."

"Right to work" is strictly dealing with the unions. Here in Missouri if I got a job at a union factory I would automatically have union dues deducted from my check. If I chose not to join the union they would still deduct money from my check, I just wouldn't have a voice in union matters, couldn't meet with the union rep unless it was to join, and I wouldn't get any of the alleged benefits of union membership. But I would still have to pay as much as if I were a voting member. Comes out automatically along with taxes.

It's a step up from when my mother was shanghaied into a union. At that time around here you could only get factory work, all factories around here were union, and union membership was automatic upon hiring. Now you can choose not to join or join and resign, though they can still extort dues out of non-members (don't argue here. Members pay by choice by choosing to remain in the union. When you're forcing non-members to pay without any protection it's extortion), but back in my mother's day if you resigned from the union you were effectively resigning from your job. Once you were out of the union you were given a "resign now to save face or you'll have the stigma of termination on you" mandate.

Right to work laws merely mean that if you get a job in a business that has a union and you choose not to join that union they can't collect union dues from you. If you join and later resign from the union they have to stop collecting union dues from you. They strengthen the protection of employees who choose not to join a union against having their job offer rescinded, and they strengthen the protection of union members who leave the union against retaliatory termination.

In other words, it's not a right to work issue that's impacting Idaho (and other states). It's the at will employment doctrine.

It is Named "Right to Work" but Defined as "Exclusive Discretionary Employment" and also includes a "Non-Competition" Clause in which an employer can require you to sign a contract legally binding you to not work doing the same kind of job for another company in the state for either a set time or indefinitely.

tiffany_elizabeth Sat Mar 28, 2020 8:15 am

Lenneth wrote:It is Named "Right to Work" but Defined as "Exclusive Discretionary Employment" and also includes a "Non-Competition" Clause in which an employer can require you to sign a contract legally binding you to not work doing the same kind of job for another company in the state for either a set time or indefinitely.

That's a case of deceptive naming, then. Right to Work has always been largely understood to be about stopping unions from forcing membership and collecting dues from non members. Basically it means that only people who want to be in a union are in a union and only union members are paying union dues.

That whole mess in Idaho... I don't know what it is but it's a mess with the right to work title applied to it. It certainly isn't right to work in any traditional sense. It's like calling a tumor a stallion to make it seem more noble than it actually is.

Lenneth Sat Mar 28, 2020 8:28 pm

tiffany_elizabeth wrote:
Lenneth wrote:It is Named "Right to Work" but Defined as "Exclusive Discretionary Employment" and also includes a "Non-Competition" Clause in which an employer can require you to sign a contract legally binding you to not work doing the same kind of job for another company in the state for either a set time or indefinitely.

That's a case of deceptive naming, then. Right to Work has always been largely understood to be about stopping unions from forcing membership and collecting dues from non members. Basically it means that only people who want to be in a union are in a union and only union members are paying union dues.

That whole mess in Idaho... I don't know what it is but it's a mess with the right to work title applied to it. It certainly isn't right to work in any traditional sense. It's like calling a tumor a stallion to make it seem more noble than it actually is.

Most locals refer to it as the "Right to Starve" law.
It is also heavily anti-Union.

Lenneth Mon May 25, 2020 6:52 am

Managed to get a different and mildly better job, still not ideal but at least is not a brutality abusive or as physically demanding.

**MichaelaSJ** Tue May 26, 2020 2:06 am

I am not necessarily pro-union, but 'Right to Work' needs to go the way child labor did. It is barbaric and definitely against the worker. The software industry got Congress to pass a law exempting programmers from overtime - Obama signed this law.

Also, I believe I am correct here, the SCOTUS has ruled that anti-competitive clauses in an employment contract violate anti-trust laws and are not enforceable. The tech companies in Silicon Valley tried that early on but the most the companies can do is limit what information you can take with you when you leave a company for another company in the same industry. This restriction is fair, but restricting an individuals right to work is anti-competitive - whatever the want to call the 'right'.

This doesn't mean that a company will not put something into a contract you sign to intimidate you - it simply isn't enforceable.

When I was 'retired' in 2012, I signed a similar contract to limit the dissemination of internal information. I remember a phone call I had two weeks later wanting to know it I would disclose the methods I used to buy land. I caught on really early in phone call and toyed with them a bit, never giving them any information the could use to recover my termination package.

I am glad you landed a position that is somewhat acceptable.

**Celia Eriksson** Tue May 26, 2020 1:08 pm

Hi Lenneth,

So that is very good news. Every human, wherever they live, whoever they be, whichever race, creed, gender, sexual preference or religion has the right to work in a safe environment with adequate pay and conditions. Anything contrary is quite barbaric and to my mind infringes human rights.

I am conservative, though I do care about human rights and green issues, particularly plastic waste. But I certainly am no red. It is quite right and possible to truly believe in the fundamentals of human rights and the care of our little blue speck without banging PC, anti-capitalist or union drums.

Celia xx

Tara Tue May 26, 2020 1:41 pm

MichaelaSJ wrote:
Also, I believe I am correct here, the SCOTUS has ruled that anti-competitive clauses in an employment contract violate anti-trust laws and are not enforceable. The tech companies in Silicon Valley tried that early on but the most the companies can do is limit what information you can take with you when you leave a company for another company in the same industry. This restriction is fair, but restricting an individuals right to work is anti-competitive - whatever the want to call the 'right'.

I believe that California specifically forbids such clauses. I believe it is the only US state to have such a law, and that was passed because of the Silicon Valley abuses you mentioned. In most other states, knowledge workers, such as programmers (that's me!), have to rely on the good-will of the company they are leaving. Perhaps there was a SCOTUS ruling as well, but I know many companies still insist on employees signing a non-compete document.

I have never been threatened by a company I was leaving, but that may simply be because they calculated that the cost of a law suit was not worth it.

Most states don't even have required time-off for holidays, vacation, or illness. It's only because companies have to compete in hiring that those things are offered as "benefits", or perquisites. I feel a rant coming on, but I'll spare you all Wink

**MichaelaSJ** Tue May 26, 2020 5:06 pm

Tara wrote:I feel a rant coming on, but I'll spare you all

Don't stop on my account!

Lenneth Fri May 29, 2020 5:21 am

MichaelaSJ wrote:I am not necessarily pro-union, but 'Right to Work' needs to go the way child labor did. It is barbaric and definitely against the worker. The software industry got Congress to pass a law exempting programmers from overtime - Obama signed this law.

Also, I believe I am correct here, the SCOTUS has ruled that anti-competitive clauses in an employment contract violate anti-trust laws and are not enforceable. The tech companies in Silicon Valley tried that early on but the most the companies can do is limit what information you can take with you when you leave a company for another company in the same industry. This restriction is fair, but restricting an individuals right to work is anti-competitive - whatever the want to call the 'right'.

oddly the State of Idaho does actively enforce such laws, to many "good ol boys" company's want it to stay that way.

Lenneth Fri May 29, 2020 6:03 am

Celia Eriksson wrote:Hi Lenneth,

So that is very good news. Every human, wherever they live, whoever they be, whichever race, creed, gender, sexual preference or religion has the right to work in a safe environment with adequate pay and conditions. Anything contrary is quite barbaric and to my mind infringes human rights.

I am conservative, though I do care about human rights and green issues, particularly plastic waste. But I certainly am no red. It is quite right and possible to truly believe in the fundamentals of human rights and the care of our little blue speck without banging PC, anti-capitalist or union drums.

Celia xx

On the Political Spectrum I guess you could call me an Anarcho-Libritarian (IE government should be strictly limited to a small group of representatives with a simple set of base laws that are malleable with a focus on positive outcome with no room for corruption), although I don't participate in the farce called Politics outside of having a well thought out personal opinion.

Presently in the US we have a problem with very loud minority groups on both primary political sides whom hold all of the strings that control the media and a lot of the tech industry (roughly 90%). these people are of the belief that if you do not share a exact copy of their views that you should be punished to the point of not being allowed to earn a living or have housing.

As you can imagine, all sorts of undesirable types have gravitated to these groups, TERF's being one of many, Hardcore Authoritarian Communists and the like also.

It has become a veritable dumpster fire which they are no longer even attempting to hide, this in a way is a good thing, the bad part is far to few are doing anything effective to tell them they aren't going to tolerate it, and the media and big tech are both working overtime to keep as much division of all kinds as active as possible.

It is really Dismaying to see this taking place, I hope enough people soon pull their heads out of the sand and just tell these nutjobs "Enough!" & stop the insanity.

It is in midst of this "Dumpster Fire" combined with the pandemic that a lot of employment and other illegality's are being ignored or simply not noticed, this is how most of the employment lawbreaking is being allowed.

Lenneth Fri May 29, 2020 6:06 am

MichaelaSJ wrote:
Tara wrote:I feel a rant coming on, but I'll spare you all
Don't stop on my account!

nor mine.

rant away, but try to keep it civil Smile

Sponsored content